After Keynesian Macroeconomics and Discussion
نویسندگان
چکیده
For the applied economist, the confident and apparently successful application of Keynesian principles to economic policy which occurred in the United States in the 1960s was an event of incomparable significance and satisfaction. These principles led to a set of simple, quantitative relationships between fiscal policy and economic activity generally, the basic logic of which could be (and was) explained to the general public, and which could be applied to yield improvements in economic performance benefiting everyone. It seemed an economics as free of ideological difficulties as, say, applied chemistry or physics, promising a straightforward expansion in economic possibilities. One might argue about how this windfall should be distributed, but it seemed a simple lapse of logic to oppose the windfall itself. Understandably and correctly, this promise was met at first with skepticism by noneconomists; the smoothly growing prosperity of the Kennedy-Johnson years did much to diminish these doubts. We dwell on these halcyon days of Keynesian economics because, without conscious effort, they are difficult to recall today. In the present decade, the U.S. economy has undergone its first major depression since the 1930s, to the accompaniment of inflation rates in excess of 10 percent per annum. These events have been transmitted (by consent of the governments involved) to other advanced countries and in many cases have been amplified. These events did not arise from a reactionary reversion to outmoded, "classical" principles of tight money and balance budgets. On the contrary, they were accompanied by massive governmental budget deficits and high rates of monetary expansion: policies which, although bearing an admitted risk of inflation, promised according to modern Keynesian doctrine rapid real growth and low rates of unemployment. That these predictions were wildly incorrect, and that the doctrine on which they were based is fundamentally flawed, are now simple matters of fact, involving no novelties in economic theory. The task which faces contemporary students of the business cycle is that of sorting through the wreckage, determining which features of that remarkable intellectual event ealted the
منابع مشابه
A Brief Introduction to Post Keynesian Macroeconomics
I begin by setting out the core of Post Keynesian macroeconomics, and then distinguish three schools within Post Keynesian theory: the fundamentalist Keynesian approach taken by Paul Davidson, the Kaleckian variant represented by Eckhard Hein, and Hyman Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis. I continue by identifying what Post Keynesian macroeconomics is not, and outlining some very substan...
متن کاملMacroeconomics: a Historical Perspective
1. Scope of Macroeconomics 2. The Keynesian View of Unemployment 2.1 A Simple Keynesian Model 2.2 Extension of the Simple Keynesian Model: A Capital Scarce, Labor Surplus Economy 2.3 Further Extension: Industry and Agriculture 3. Money, Keynes, and the Classics 3.1 The Classical Theory of Employment 3.2 The Keynesian Revolution 3.3 Friedman’s Counter-revolution 4. New Classical Macroeconomics 4...
متن کاملGetting rid of Keynes? A reflection on the recent history of macroeconomics
The aim of this paper is to give an account of the unfolding of macroeconomics from Keynes to the present day. To this end, I use a grid of analysis resulting from the combination of two distinctions. The first is the Marshall-Walras divide, the second is the distinction between the Keynesian conceptual apparatus and the Keynesian policy cause. On the basis of these distinctions, I construct tw...
متن کاملDisequilibrium macroeconomics: an episode in the transformation of modern macroeconomics
ed from issues they could not handle but which enabled them to analyse the dynamics in which they were interested. However, a more common reaction was to focus on the formal models and to confine their theorizing to what could be said rigorously. Founding macroeconomics on rigorous utilitymaximizing microfoundations was important. This was, no doubt, the reason why Patinkin’s Chapter 13 was neg...
متن کامل° 2008 - 02 Inflation targeting drawbacks in the absence of a ' natural ' anchor
The economic performances of the Eurozone look weaker than those of the United States over the period 1999-2006, in spite of the fact that the former applies more thoroughly the 'new macroeconomics' governance rules concerning public deficits and inflation control. The literature emphasizes Alan Greenspan's pragmatism when discussing the relative success of the Fed, but the reasons why pragmati...
متن کامل